Staff Led or Student Led?

I always wonder about where this line lies.  In the days of in loco parentis, we were obviously supposed to be hovering and doing things for students.  But in 2010, in loco parentis is supposed (in theory) to not exist and not factor.  I’d argue that it does.

With the threat of litigation, enormous bureaucracies to contend with, and legal questions of responsibility in the event something goes afoul, I think functionally we’ve inhibited our students ability to go about things their own way.  We have to fight their battles for them, we have to take the fall and be responsible should something bad happen and we have to lead them through the maze of the university system.

It’s sad.  It really is.

I believe that systems have the ability  inhibit growth.  It’s essentially the message of much of Malcolm Gladwell’s work – systems can be used for good or evil and I believe many times the systems in student affairs work against giving students the freedom to try and to fail and to take ownership.  The staff is pressured to lead things, partly so there can be someone “responsible” (a bullshit idea that students can’t be that person) to blame when something goes wrong.

Systems become overwhelming to students because they are so complex that it can take a new staff member a year to learn them.  How can a student be expected to learn them in 5-10 hours a week?

And I’m not even going to begin on the threat of litigation….

But shouldn’t we as staff work towards making what we do a more visible part of student learning?  Shouldn’t we make the student learning that happens in student affairs more visible and work to eliminate systems that inhibit learning?  Isn’t this our damn job?